Re: Alternate header locations

From:

Stewart Brodie

Subject:

Re: Alternate header locations

Date:

Tue, 15 Oct 2002 10:42:01 +0100

User-agent:

Messenger-Pro/2.59beta2 (Newsbase/0.61b) (RISC-OS/4.00-Ursula002f)

In message <address@hidden>
Soren A <address@hidden> wrote:
> Guido Draheim <address@hidden> wrote around 15 Oct 2002
>news:address@hidden:
>
> > Oh, btw, it might be better to not check for utime.h itself but for the
> > functionality that you want to get from it - some platforms have weird
> > locations for something a unixish system has a "standard" place for.
>
> I know. But there's a reason i didn't do it that way, and i suppose that
> other users will have similar situations. The reason is that I am not
> going to go combing through the source code of this application that i
> am not writing or maintaining, just to figure out what the guy who did
> write it needs <utime.h> for. So I can be accused of laziness -- but in
> fact there's nothing lazy about my doing this build-porting
> (Autoconfiscating) that nobody asked me to do in the first place. So in
> that particular instance there are multiple issues to be addressed and
> they do not all have (cannot all be given) the same urgency.
One approach to finding out why a header is required is to simply remove the
inclusion of that header and see what falls over. That will at least show
you one place where declarations from that header are required. It's more
complicated than that to find all the uses of such declarations, of course.
--
Stewart Brodie, Senior Software Engineer Cambridge CVS administration team
Pace Micro Technology PLC
645 Newmarket Road
Cambridge, CB5 8PB, United Kingdom WWW: http://www.pacemicro.com/